Claim:
If Time Travel would be true throughout the history of human kind, at any point in time whether past or future, time travellers would be "all over us" in telling about the future or past or whatever.
However, there are no stories of either such people or common stories of such being told from one person (the traveller) to another.
Therefore, time travel isn't going to exist ever!
Logic: Modus tollens
If Time Travel then Time Travellers (or common stories of such)
No Time Travellers
No Time Travel
Please remember that:
An assumption that Time Travellers are lying to us all the time is an unreasonable story!
Also, stories of the future would hold a kind of plausibility or coherence so that if the stories would be prevalent then the "Nostradamus" stories would be recorded or a record of place and people would be with us.
The coherence here would be that of our reality entails/is able to hold the story of the future by specific calculations, inventions, a record of history from the future or technology all the way up to that point in time.
A fake story of time travelling will quickly fall apart because it's not coherent with you travelling in time and discovering new histories of science in the future or whatever the "bridged" story that marks a genuine story of time travelling. First, fx., where's your time-travelling UFO? In your garage?
Good?
Showing posts with label Time. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Time. Show all posts
Thursday, 6 April 2017
Friday, 26 July 2013
World History and Time - The Names, The Achievements...
There are some names which are more cool than others and as usual I have my favourites, given World History and Time, 4 names:
Thomas Aquinas (1225 - 1274)
Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804)
Søren Kierkegaard (1813 - 1855)
Karl Popper (1902 - 1994)
to start...
Who else? Let me think about it and why don't you make your own list too? We can use a number of histories and other, such as the Nobel Prizes, all combined.
:-)
(I don't bother to make a negative list.)
Thomas Aquinas (1225 - 1274)
Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804)
Søren Kierkegaard (1813 - 1855)
Karl Popper (1902 - 1994)
to start...
Who else? Let me think about it and why don't you make your own list too? We can use a number of histories and other, such as the Nobel Prizes, all combined.
:-)
(I don't bother to make a negative list.)
Sunday, 28 August 2011
On Metaphysics of Time
On Metaphysics of Time
[by Terje Lea 12. July 2011, time 08:42 by Facebook data only.]
[This begins with a drawing, crude and principal, but useful.]
Spherical waves eminating from agents as a picture to possibly state how one is able to predict ideas.
The time moves along the y/z-axis while your view is positioned at origo or along a somewhat objective history x where the x-line (with no value as such) represents the threshold between past and future and thereby is the resultgiving x-plane on how the spherical waves entwine and create history and thereby giving you a certain historical view. This exposition of time can also be seen as a kind of psychometry (please associate this with telemetry). Make the most of your time!
I can deduce consistency and coherency from Descartes' Meditations and if you have consistency and coherency, you also have continuity, the flow of time!
This is primarily made to describe the ongoing passage of time in relation to agents (people) and their ideas.
This view here can be referred to as Block time or Eternalism, yet I think it's too radical to deduct our psychological experience of closeness of the present and what it represents. In my view, it's implicit that you should maximise the use of your experience through time so that the scope of future becomes as wide as possible.
We can surely say that the past of time has generated the course for the present moment and equally surely we can say the future lies in the scope of the present even though the future consists in only one course, becoming both the present and the past. Therefore, it's not irrelevant what has taken place in the past and the future has to come out of what is our present moment! We can look at everything in our present moment and conclude with certainty that a number of things must have led up to this. At least, this must be the nature of reality, otherwise we wouldn't be alive in exactly this scope of reality as it is. I think this supports block theory of time. This may be plain and is thus probably more pedagogical than informative. My view, however, is now more deeply explained and should be impossible to retreat from unless I trash the whole block theory of time.
McTaggart is wrong in presenting his A and B bands/tracks dichotomy. I believe the origin of time historically has its roots in the seasons, the Sun and possibly the life span of human kind by every single person. The clock is thus determined by the 24 hrs cycle of the Sun (on Earth), essentially giving the time when the Sun is highest through the day. Later, one has divided the Earth into 24 time zones with few exceptions. McTaggart comes out weak in his academic life of presenting time as he does. Let me guess he has lived an incredibly relaxed life with few necessary daily routines. This is from the reason that everyone, historically, has their primary activities during the day and catches the sleep during the night. This is undeniable if one goes back to the medieval times, at least. It is eventually the objective time, given by the Sun and the passing of years, historically, that triumphs the notion of time whether you sense time in this way or that or have funny thoughts about time.
Just let me clarify:
Time is, of course, a physical requirement, being at least, 1 of 4 dimensions. This is not the question. The question is how we as human beings have come to know time, both as concept and our cognition of it. Historically, I believe one has addressed "a day's worth of work", but the revolve of the Earth making the days has been essential of this formation. I believe the timing of motion is quite recent (1400 CE or so, just as a guess, especially in referring to the feather and stone experiment in testing gravity and at the same time having the perception of time in this regard). One can perhaps check out the invention of the first time-taking pieces or clocks on Wikipedia.
Clearly then, there's no questioning of time as such, but it's worth noting that we all live under the sun and it remains our compass of time until then! This may change if we settle in a new star system, but this is not some time soon, I can predict.
In responding to Charles Taylor, Metaphysics, 4th ed., this fleeting moment, referring in particular to The Elusive Present, pp. 85-87, of the present can only float in one direction, forward!
Time is also stuck to the time-track. 1980/01/01 CE will always be 1980/01/01 CE even if you consider it as 1980 CE + 13,7 x 10^9 CE years. This will always yield present time point, X CE + 13,7 x 10^9 CE where 13,7 x 10^9 CE is the most precise scientific estimate of the universe relevant to time and X is current date by year or date. I can write it like this: X + S being the X years from 0 CE and the scientific estimate from 0 CE to the beginning of the universe according to the Big Bang theory and scientific community's consensus.
The time of relativity/absurdism is slashed in the Metaphysical sense of Time theory.
This is also meant as an indicium for free will and the rationalist's approach, only in this regard.
Note. Don't pay too much attention to "rationalist's approach". It's simply put this way for suggesting the special place consciousness may have in regarding events of time and especially the consciousness of other "agents" in this perspective.
©Terje Lea, 2001-2010 with 25.03.2010, 26.03.2010, 12.04.2010, 19.04.2010, 27.04.2010 and 28.04.2010. A little comment has been added, 20.05.2010, to the word "psychometry".
Back to front page.
[by Terje Lea 12. July 2011, time 08:42 by Facebook data only.]
[This begins with a drawing, crude and principal, but useful.]
The time moves along the y/z-axis while your view is positioned at origo or along a somewhat objective history x where the x-line (with no value as such) represents the threshold between past and future and thereby is the resultgiving x-plane on how the spherical waves entwine and create history and thereby giving you a certain historical view. This exposition of time can also be seen as a kind of psychometry (please associate this with telemetry). Make the most of your time!
I can deduce consistency and coherency from Descartes' Meditations and if you have consistency and coherency, you also have continuity, the flow of time!
This is primarily made to describe the ongoing passage of time in relation to agents (people) and their ideas.
This view here can be referred to as Block time or Eternalism, yet I think it's too radical to deduct our psychological experience of closeness of the present and what it represents. In my view, it's implicit that you should maximise the use of your experience through time so that the scope of future becomes as wide as possible.
We can surely say that the past of time has generated the course for the present moment and equally surely we can say the future lies in the scope of the present even though the future consists in only one course, becoming both the present and the past. Therefore, it's not irrelevant what has taken place in the past and the future has to come out of what is our present moment! We can look at everything in our present moment and conclude with certainty that a number of things must have led up to this. At least, this must be the nature of reality, otherwise we wouldn't be alive in exactly this scope of reality as it is. I think this supports block theory of time. This may be plain and is thus probably more pedagogical than informative. My view, however, is now more deeply explained and should be impossible to retreat from unless I trash the whole block theory of time.
McTaggart is wrong in presenting his A and B bands/tracks dichotomy. I believe the origin of time historically has its roots in the seasons, the Sun and possibly the life span of human kind by every single person. The clock is thus determined by the 24 hrs cycle of the Sun (on Earth), essentially giving the time when the Sun is highest through the day. Later, one has divided the Earth into 24 time zones with few exceptions. McTaggart comes out weak in his academic life of presenting time as he does. Let me guess he has lived an incredibly relaxed life with few necessary daily routines. This is from the reason that everyone, historically, has their primary activities during the day and catches the sleep during the night. This is undeniable if one goes back to the medieval times, at least. It is eventually the objective time, given by the Sun and the passing of years, historically, that triumphs the notion of time whether you sense time in this way or that or have funny thoughts about time.
Just let me clarify:
Time is, of course, a physical requirement, being at least, 1 of 4 dimensions. This is not the question. The question is how we as human beings have come to know time, both as concept and our cognition of it. Historically, I believe one has addressed "a day's worth of work", but the revolve of the Earth making the days has been essential of this formation. I believe the timing of motion is quite recent (1400 CE or so, just as a guess, especially in referring to the feather and stone experiment in testing gravity and at the same time having the perception of time in this regard). One can perhaps check out the invention of the first time-taking pieces or clocks on Wikipedia.
Clearly then, there's no questioning of time as such, but it's worth noting that we all live under the sun and it remains our compass of time until then! This may change if we settle in a new star system, but this is not some time soon, I can predict.
In responding to Charles Taylor, Metaphysics, 4th ed., this fleeting moment, referring in particular to The Elusive Present, pp. 85-87, of the present can only float in one direction, forward!
Time is also stuck to the time-track. 1980/01/01 CE will always be 1980/01/01 CE even if you consider it as 1980 CE + 13,7 x 10^9 CE years. This will always yield present time point, X CE + 13,7 x 10^9 CE where 13,7 x 10^9 CE is the most precise scientific estimate of the universe relevant to time and X is current date by year or date. I can write it like this: X + S being the X years from 0 CE and the scientific estimate from 0 CE to the beginning of the universe according to the Big Bang theory and scientific community's consensus.
The time of relativity/absurdism is slashed in the Metaphysical sense of Time theory.
This is also meant as an indicium for free will and the rationalist's approach, only in this regard.
Note. Don't pay too much attention to "rationalist's approach". It's simply put this way for suggesting the special place consciousness may have in regarding events of time and especially the consciousness of other "agents" in this perspective.
©Terje Lea, 2001-2010 with 25.03.2010, 26.03.2010, 12.04.2010, 19.04.2010, 27.04.2010 and 28.04.2010. A little comment has been added, 20.05.2010, to the word "psychometry".
Back to front page.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)